- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28888 WP No. 15862 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 15862 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI B. RAJANNA S/O. CHIKKA BACHAPPA @ SADAHALLI BACHAPPA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, 2. SRI. RAMAKRISHNAPPA S/O. CHIKKA BACHAPPA @ SADAHALLI BACHAPPA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, 3. SRI. SHIVANNA, S/O. CHIKKA BACHAPPA @ SADAHALLI BACHAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, 4. SRI. NARAYANASWAMY B, S/O. CHIKKA BACHAPPA @ SADAHALLI BACHAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT BAGALURU VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562149. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVASHANKAR K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28888 WP No. 15862 of 2026 MS BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY REVENUE SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, KANDAYA BHAVANA K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION, II FLOOR, KANDAYA BHAVANA K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, YELAHANKA TALUK, YELAHANKA BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-560064. 5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, NADA KACHERI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-560064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS.3 TO 5 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.02.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28888 WP No. 15862 of 2026 ORAL ORDER Learned HCGP accepts notice for respondents. 2. In this petition, petitioners have sought for a direction on respondent Nos.3 to 5, to consider the representation dated 12.02.2024 (Annexure-D) in respect of the subject property. 3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful consideration of the averments made in the representation dated 12.02.2024 (Annexure-D), it would indicate that some private parties namely, Late. A. Ramakrishnappa S/o. Anjinappa has interfered with the property belonging to the petitioners herein. 4. The dispute is purely is of civil in nature and it is open for the petitioners to establish their right over the property seeking appropriate relief before the civil Court. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the prayer made in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE VBS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35